A government White Paper on its plans to deal with the housing crisis is expected shortly which may affect Rye’s Neighbourhood Plan. This first article in a series about Rye’s Plan looks at housing issues, and the next will focus on transport and parking concerns.
A small historic coastal town decided last year that any new build should only be for local residents – not second homes – as part of its Neighbourhood Plan – and Rye may vote on its Neighbourhood Plan this year. St Ives in Cornwall took this decision and Lynton and Lynmouth in Devon have taken a similar step, after growing numbers of homes were empty for a significant part of the year because they were second homes and/or holiday lets.
Neighbourhood Plans were introduced as part of the 2011 Localism Act in order to give local communities control over their affairs. In practice, though, questions have already been raised about whether Neighbourhood Plans can be overridden by government ministers in light of changing national needs or policies.
However, according to the dictionaries, a plan may be just an intention, or it may be a detailed proposal for doing or achieving something, or it may be about deciding something in advance. But circumstances may change and the plan may depend on others whose circumstances and plans may change too. A plan therefore may include aspirations (wouldn’t it be a good idea if . . .), suggestions (the County Council should think about . . .) and specific points (this land can not be used for housing) ; and any vote needs to distinguish between dreams, things within Rye’s control, and decisions that may be made by one, or many more, stages higher than Rye’s Town Council.
Rye’s Neighbourhood Plan is therefore very long (some 149 pages currently, plus various appendices whose final length is uncertain) because it has to take in others’ policies and circumstances – all of which may keep changing. Parking, which will feature in the next article, is a good example of this as government and the County and District Councils all have fingers in the pie. Please note also that the plan is still currently a draft and is being put out for consultation with various other bodies like Rother District Council before a final version is agreed and put to a referendum.
So, let us return to St Ives and look at housing issues for our first article on Rye’s Neighbourhood Plan. I have been there on holiday since the 1980s and I must have stayed in at least 30 different places, some quite often, and some only once! Some were bed and breakfast establishments s and some were holiday lets where the owners were clearly around a lot. But others were clearly holiday businesses where the owner rarely, if ever, stayed. And out of season there were consequences.
One January I recall a St Ives pub had BOGOF (Buy One Get One Free) while others had regular incentives such as local musicians playing, while just round the corner another had posters saying “No musicians allowed”. The town was generally very, very quiet. Indeed some businesses ran on the basis of being in St Ives from Easter to September and the Canaries in October to Easter – a case of following the customer.
But it was a town that was a hive of festivals and events and very similar to Rye in many ways. Salcombe in nearby Devon, though, was an example of a place that did die in winter, or so it seemed. It was really only a sailing centre with many million-pound-plus houses way beyond locals’ pockets. Seasonal staff ended up in bunk bed attics while the sun shone and the wind was friendly. Could Rye go the same way? Or should it follow St Ives and try to stop the rot?
The short answer is yes, it could go the same way and probably we should try to stop the rot. To find a starter home here for a young family (so probably two bedrooms) would require a household income of around £50,000 I am told. This might be possible perhaps for two adults, both with proper jobs (so forget minimum wage, zero hour contracts), but not for many – who would therefore look in Ashford or Hastings possibly.
However Rother District Council’s most recent figures showed 175 second homes in Rye and there are third homes as well. And buy to let purchases are on the increase in Rye, though how many are going to be holiday lets and how many for long term rent is not clear. And in the meantime the percentage of larger homes being built in Valley Park on the edge of Rye seems to have increased since the initial planning permission was granted – despite the need in Rye being for two bed affordable housing for young families and older people wanting to downsize.
The net result currently is that, while birthrate is on the increase (with the primary school having to expand) , Rye’s population overall is much older – and getting even older – than other parts of the country. The over-60s are expected to increase in the next decade from 28% of Rye’s population to 38% and, while the million plus visitors a year might help the economy, holiday lets and uncertain low paid service jobs continue to increase apparently – so the community is ageing and emptying (for parts of the year).
In those circumstances should we be following St Ives’ example and demanding that any new building in future should only be for sale or letting to local residents or people coming to work here? And should development permission should be appropriate to their needs ie two to three bed affordable homes?
The alternative may be a town that dies between October and March, with even more needs being met online and doorstep deliveries rather than local shops, and with a community that is beginning to fail.
On the other hand retirees, incomers or whatever you like to call them (and I am one) who live here full time (even if working elsewhere, Southern permitting) do contribute a lot to the community before (sadly) their energy begins to fail, and may well have looked for a home here after first coming as a visitor. So there are no easy answers – and maybe the Neighbourhood Plan can come up with a more balanced approach to meeting housing needs.
Photo: Sussex Heritage Trust
Image Credits: Sussex Heritage Trust .
St Ives only says that newly built homes are only for sale to people as permanent residences. There is no requirement for buyers to already be locals (whatever that means), nor is there a requirement to work locally – you can retire there. And what is a permanent resident? You have to be occupy the home for 270 days a year! Possibly unenforceable and also a licence for the nastiest of snoopers to keep tally on people who may have to visit ailing relatives, or take part-time consultancy work in other parts of the country or world. Imagine living in a community where you are dobbed in by a neighbour who claims you have only been resident in your home for 269 days by their dubious count. Or having a neighbour who wants you slung out as you have spent 80 days away in the past year with a dying parent.
However, I do like the idea of more affordable houses. And I like the idea of more purpose built homes for the elderly who are looking to downsize. Lastly, I like the idea of more office/studio spaces for start up businesses . We’ve got upstairs in the Rye Creative Centre and that’s about it. And that will go when ESCC cashes in and sells the site off shortly.
I speak as an incomer to Rye who used to be a second home owner but then moved permanently to the town. However, I would fail a permanent residence test as I spend 1 or 2 days a week in London and go on holiday for 3 or 4 weeks a year.
I agree housing in Rye needs attention but my point is slightly different. I had occasion to leaflet the Landgate, Tower Street, Wish Street area and was surprised at the number of empty properties, some with sealed letter boxes and signs of dereliction, lack of basic cleaning and maintenance, etc.
If these homes are being left empty for years or possibly decades at a time of shortage, that is a scandal.
Can someone tell me how many empty properties, residential and commercial, there are in Rye? They should be compulsorily purchased from absent or unknown owners and refurbished for occupation. I understand Hastings has similar powers.